Thursday, May 19, 2011

The Challenge of Pursuing Justice



This cartoon by my friend David Hayward, who posts his blogs and cartoons over at nakedpastor.com, captures the tension and emotion I’ve been trying to process in light of several recent realities.

Many of you will be aware of the online petitions that madly circulated the last few days of the Ugandan parliament deliberations. The dreaded anti-homosexuality bill that had been simmering in the background for the last couple years was front and centre with a very real possibility of it being passed into law. For those of us who have been following these developments, who have prayed and interceded with tears for LGBT people in Uganda, this was our nightmare. And we were grateful for the hundreds of thousands of people who typed their name in solidarity with those calling for the only humane response to this bill: its defeat. There was a triumphant media blitz proclaiming just such defeat when the parliament did not have time to vote on this and a few other controversial bills. But perhaps others, like myself, who are close to these issues, who have followed it when it wasn’t in the spotlight, felt a sense of unease with the dramatic proclamations of victory. For me, this unease came with knowing that no change had been accomplished in this turn of events. Life is still hell for LGBT people in Uganda and other parts of Africa and the world. Hearts had not changed. Minds hadn’t even been changed. And with the bill out of the spotlight, what action would the hundreds of thousands of people who signed their names take on behalf of LGBT people who face oppression and injustice? This unease became more tangible with the report that the bill will return to the 9th parliament of Uganda when it is convened.

Some of you may have also followed the controversy that has surrounded Jim Wallis and his Sojourners organization. Sojourners has been working for social justice for decades. They have managed to build relationships and credibility across a wide swath of the Christian community in their fight against poverty and racism. To many, it would seem a no brainer that Sojourner would be an appropriate place to run an ad that advocated a hospitable welcome to LGBT people. So, when Sojo’s turned down the Believe Out Loud request to run their video in their advertising sidebar, many were shocked, confused and felt a sense of betrayal.



The video, itself, seems to be advocating a message that any follower of Jesus should be able to support. The organization who created the video, however, does have a clear position stated as: A partnership of the country’s leading LGBT advocacy groups, both religious and secular, Believe Out Loud seeks to accelerate the existing Christian movement toward LGBT inclusion and significantly increase the number of local churches and denominations that are fully-inclusive of LGBT individuals, both in practice and policy. In doing so, we seek to create a widespread Christian movement for LGBT equality in the church and in broader society.

This clear goal of advancing towards LGBT inclusion and equality will be interpreted by many with a traditional sexual ethic as inconsistent with their understanding of Scripture’s guidance on these matters. And here’s the rub for Sojo – they have deliberately sought to not align with one position or another on LGBT matters because of the polarizing effect that would have on their desire to mobilize their constituency on matters of poverty and race. Bottom line is – their ability to steward influence and raise money for the advocacy issues they have prioritized would be compromised by aligning with one side of the polarized debate on LGBT matters. The question is, how can you advocate for dignity and justice for one group – and seemingly ignore the need for dignity and justice for another? To adapt the words of Desmond Tutu, if I diminish the need for justice for one group, I diminish the pursuit of justice for all groups.

Now some will argue that advocating for hospitality for LGBT people in the church is not a justice issue – because they do not even acknowledge the reality of LGBT people (aka – there are no homosexual people, only heterosexual people with a homosexual problem). Others will refer to the vague, fear-based notion of ‘the gay agenda’. And inevitably, people with such perspectives are unlikely to want to engage in dialogue seeking common ground. Thus the power plays and politics and boycotts rule the day. And the ideal gives way to priorities made in the mess and frustration of reality. Do you sacrifice justice for a small minority group in order to continue to garner influence for the betterment of a larger marginalized group? At what point is your internal integrity at stake because at a foundational level it is the value of our shared humanity that is compromised when we need to sacrifice justice for one group for another?

Lest anyone think these are simple and clear-cut decisions, I’d urge all of us to refrain from quick judgments and pronouncements. The complexity and paradoxes and systems that inform these matters confound the wise and experienced and principled and active. If anything, such challenge ought to humble us.

It has led me to ponder, again, the distinction between activism and advocacy. In previous posts, I’ve suggested that activism is about issues and advocacy is about people. I’m not sure if that would be a universally held distinction – but it has helped me. To add to this, I think activism calls for a holy impatience. Activists are motivated by an incredible sense of urgency. They want to get things DONE. I might suggest that advocates are actually called to cultivate patience. They know that the process of heart and mind change is slow. They know systems don’t change overnight. They understand that the ideal of all issues being equal rarely is workable in the chaotic reality of working towards paradigmatic change. We need activists. And we need advocates. And sometimes the two are not going to understand each other and might even see their work at odds with each other. But I think we will all benefit when we see the role each plays. And some are called to the huge challenge of embodying both activism and advocacy and living in the tension of holy impatience while cultivating patience. They need our prayers and our support - for that is not an easy road to travel.

But none of this theorizing relieves the LGBT person sitting in an African prison, in conditions we in the west can’t even imagine. It doesn’t help the lesbian who is struggling to overcome the trauma of corrective rape. It doesn’t change the desperation of a homeless LGBT youth who is getting to the point of turning to prostitution to survive. It doesn’t silence the bully. It doesn’t reverse job discrimination. It doesn’t nullify prejudice of landlords refusing LGBT tenants.

And ignoring these matters, or justifying our complacency because there are more pressing issues, or telling LGBT to just hang in there these things will be addressed eventually is unacceptable and inconsistent with the character of Christ. Even for those who oppose civil rights for LGBT people, let them hear these words of Miroslav Volf, “Reject the love of enemy, and you undo the Christian faith”.

In times when it is easy to be overwhelmed by the largeness and complexity of the issues, remember that change comes one step at a time. Begin by making more room in your own heart for those who differ from you. Be that intercessor who stands in the gap. Have that conversation in your church about becoming more tangibly hospitable to anyone from your neighbourhood. Train yourself to remember that the diminishment of any human being diminishes you – and so catch yourself when the judgmental thought comes, that look of disdain crosses your face, that desire to avoid rises up in your heart. Speak out at your work place or school when you hear language that excludes or demeans. Read that link your LGBT friend sends you. Don’t tune out. Don’t forget. Don’t distract yourself. Stay present – and in being present be the change you want to see.

-WG

20 comments:

  1. i see nothing wrong in Boycotting Sojo as they have gotten in the LGBTQ convo by advocating against bullying. Jim Wallis is someone i highly disrespect now. Setting boundaries is a great thing to know how to do. There is NO MORE sitting on the fence for me and the people i know. There are many poverty-stricken queer folks and poor can mean poor in spirit as well, which we know our LGBTQ peeps are for many of them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're right Adele - Sojo has made forays into this arena in their comments about bullying - and that makes the decision not to run the ad that much more confusing. You have the holy impatience of an activist that I think is needed in the Body. My hope and prayer is that in the midst of standing up for justice there won't be a perpetuation of the same 'us vs. them' that was trying to be overcome in the first place. This is the hard work in living the response to Jesus' prayer in John 17 that we would be one that the world might know that the Father sent the Son.
    While a boycott may be an effective catalyst for change - creating tangible entry points for building community together with those on the margins - for whatever reason - where no one goes without and we are the poor together - and therefore no longer poor - these will be the spaces where true transformation begins to take root and in time bear fruit. Nurturing spaces of hospitality where friendships can flourish is one of the most effective ways I can dream to see shalom bless the lives of the poor and isolated.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wendy, I would appreciate your comments on the idea that "there are no homosexual people, only heterosexual people with a homosexual problem."

    If the "homosexual problem" is not 'fixable', then what?

    Wendy, you've worked long and hard in the LGBTQ community; and, through walking with your gay neighbors, what has your journey shown you concerning even this elemental controversy about "what is homosexuality and how 'fixable' is it"?

    If we can't even come to a consensus about the starting line, little will follow, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Excellent post, Wendy. I particularly wanted to highlight the following statement you made and relate it back to the Soujourners decision:

    It doesn’t change the desperation of a homeless LGBT youth who is getting to the point of turning to prostitution to survive.

    In that statement you have beautifully drawn a connecting line through three different issues:

    1. LGBT issues.
    2. Poverty.
    3. Prostitution.

    And that's my issue with Sojourners decision, along with anyone else who prioritizes one issue over another: these issues don't exist in individual vacuums. For many LGBT people (such as the gay teen whose parents kick him out), LGBT issues can quickly become an economic/poverty issue. As such, Sojourner's decision to "stay out of LGBT issues" effectively diminishes their effectiveness in combating poverty -- their high priority issue -- when it comes to LGBT people. That's a reality that Sojourners will eventually have to grapple with at some point in order to continue their work to end poverty.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey Adele. I saw you posting on Peter's blog as well. Seems like we read similar blogs.

    I can understand that you're disappointed. However, I think that advocating against bullying and being for full inclusion of partnered LGBTQ people in churches (as Wendy pointed out, not only as attendants but as fully equal) are two pairs of shoes in my opinion.

    You see, I can imagine that some people in the Sojo board might be at a place where they still believe that we are hurting ourselves and our relationship to God with what we're doing. They acknowledge our right to choose how to live our lives and they respect us. But they might still think that it's not an ideal way of life and shouldn't be promoted as such in churches.

    Now, clearly, this is where they differ from you (and also from me, although I'm in a state of constant doubt about everything anyway). But if this is really what some of them believe, I don't find their public handling of the topic inconsistent.

    And I just don't want to disregard people like them. I'm sure that if our relationships are really blessed by God they will come around to realize this eventually.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am so frustrated, discouraged and angry. SO angry. It seems like every day, despite reports that opinion polls are showing a growing support for LGBT civil rights, some new law gets passed that is intended to strangle us, allow us to come to harm. Minnesota has deemed that we are unworthy of being allowed to comfort a dying loved one in hospital. Tennessee has just decided that no municipality is allowed to stop anti-gay discrimination. 31 states have amended their constitutions to prohibit our civil marriage.

    It is extremely difficult for me NOT to have an "us vs them" mindset when daily, DAILY, I read about yet one more faith-based initiative designed to punish us. I have absolutely NO compassion for the Christian who, as Tobias describes, "might be at a place where they still believe that we are hurting ourselves and our relationship to God with what we're doing. They acknowledge our right to choose how to live our lives and they respect us. But they might still think that it's not an ideal way of life and shouldn't be promoted as such in churches."

    ..,because ultimately it is that condescending, patronizing attitude that allows for the bigotry that is being legislated in state after state. It is the attitude that is killing us. Killing us. And I would strongly disagree with Tobias that they respect us. They do not. And their lack of respect for the dignity of our lives is used by the more extreme as permission to punish us with every means they can find.

    Activist. Yes. The danger that is daily being legislated against us is too great for me to be otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you everyone for your comments.

    Teresa - I think I'll try to tackle your questions in another post.

    Brian - your anger is understandable. I'm sorry that so many public actions are in opposition to LGBT people. I'm afraid very few straight people are aware of their own straight privilege and even fewer straight Christians. On a weekly basis I try to raise awareness in the Christian community - but sometimes it feels like a drop in the ocean.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ::taking a deep calming breath::

    Thanks, Wendy. Please keep putting that drop in the ocean. You have my deepest gratitude.

    ReplyDelete
  9. maybe it will be a small encouragement to you brian to know that i preached in a very traditional mennonite church on sunday morning - and the message of hospitality and welcoming diversity was very well received (i was a bit surprised actually)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hey Brian. Maybe it's really the difference of culture. I'm from Germany and here the situation is just different. Public opinion on the large is not dictated by religious believes. I think our equal rights are very good already (civil partnership, anti-discrimination laws, etc.). And personally, in Germany, I prefer Christians who still honestly wrestle with this over the general notion of "just do what you think is good for you" which can also boil down to a "I don't care about your life". But I'm sure I would feel different if I had the feeling that my rights are in question. The thing is that Sojo claims to fully support equal civil rights for LGBTQ people. I think it's good to hold them accountable to that!

    I cam understand your animosity against Christian organizations that try to take away your rights. Still I'm not sure if Sojo is the right target.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hi Tobias - it was a bad morning when I made my previous post. Clearly it was not my most nuanced response! I think you're right about a cultural difference. Here in the US it seems that Christianity, and fundamentalist Christianity in particular, gets a lot of air time and permeates the public mindset to a very high degree. To the point that it can appear unpatriotic to hold a different religious view or (even worse) be atheist.

    I can't help but think that it is this pervasiveness of fundamentalist thought that makes our culture absolutely lose it's collective mind over the human body, nudity, sex, sexuality... where even thinking about such things is crime enough to be sent to hell. IMHO it is fundamentalist memes that comprise (in US culture) the default attitudes of people who have not yet fully examined what they believe and why.

    Of course this may be my bias from having been raised by born-again Christians - and having deliberately walked away from that faith I now see the devil (so to speak) everywhere.

    When I posted earlier I was more upset about what was happening in Minnesota and Tennessee; my disgust with Sojo is because I believe this side-stepping of LGBT dignity is complicit with/enabling of the injustices that are being made into law. Even more disgusted by the side-stepping of their culpability by claiming neutrality in the matter. From where I sit it looks like enormous hypocrisy. Betrayal. I couldn't agree with Wendy more when she asks "The question is, how can you advocate for dignity and justice for one group – and seemingly ignore the need for dignity and justice for another?"

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hey Brian, thanks for your words. Yeah, I get what you're saying. We're not so different in our upbringing and our path. Just maybe in that we live in different cultures.

    I repeat what I said above: I'm absolutely for holding them accountable! But I think it's not the right way to boycott them because of the rejection of this one video. This won't change anything. I mean... it's already off the radar for most people again. Instead we should walk with people like them and be a constant reminder to them that they cannot dismiss us.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks for this! we would love to stay connected with you in blog-land! www.intervarsity.org/blog

    ReplyDelete
  14. The conclusion of this entry is contradictory to the rest of the article. After recognizing the reality of LGBT people facing the death penalty, hate crimes, homelessness and corrective rape, and boldly stating that "...ignoring these matters, or justifying our complacency because there are more pressing issues, or telling LGBT to just hang in there these things will be addressed eventually is unacceptable and inconsistent with the character of Christ". You go on to recommend that your readers (who you clearly assume to be exclusively straight Christians) "make more room in [their] hearts", and "stay present". The closest thing to action recommended is to "Speak out at your work place or school when you hear language that excludes or demeans", a call that, in the context of an article that assumes no LGBT readers, I can only read as sarcasm.

    I see no difference between complacency and "staying present". Both fail to address prejudice and discrimination. How do you justify your call to complacency?

    ReplyDelete
  15. hello myka - welcome to btg - i don't think i've seen a comment from you before.

    i am grateful that there is a diverse readership of this blog - so no, i don't assume readers are straight christians. it is, however, straight christians whom i feel particularly need to wrestle with these matters. the conclusion of this post is intended to offer some concrete, albeit baby steps, that a person who may conveniently maintain theoretical distance from these matters could actually incorporate. sarcasm isn't intended - but an awareness that this isn't an activist blog - it is a relationally focused blog calling for engagement. staying present - in the manner i intend it - is a first step to sustainable consideration of these matters. when confronted with matters that are too big, too overwhelming .... to learn to stay present is something very concrete, incarnational, and can lead to deeper engagement - including activism if that is a particular person's call.

    ReplyDelete
  16. While you may not intend it, your assumption of straight Christian readers reveals itself in your language. Here's an example of how you have written in a manner that assumes a heterosexual reader and writer: "...justifying our complacency...or telling LGBT to just hang in there..." (I'm assuming that this instance of "LGBT" without a descriptor of "matters" or "people" was a mistake and unintentional, not the utter dehumanization of a group of people by reducing them to letters.)

    "this isn't an activist blog - it is a relationally focused blog calling for engagement."

    I think you're making a critical mistake in that distinction. In writing this blog, you are developing relationships, even with readers who may never comment. In calling straight Christians to "stay present" you are calling for them to intentionally change their social environment. While I know engaging in "LGBT activism" is severely stigmatized in conservative Christian circles, what you are calling for is action to social change, which is activism. While activism is about issues, you cannot separate issues from people or people from relationships. Asking people to stay present is asking people to change their relationships. I call that activism. Activism on behalf of LGBT people. Maintaining your organization's position within the church and other Christian circles may not allow you to call activism what it is, but you need to at least stop pretending that's not what you're doing.

    Also, regarding relationships with readers, please realize that readers may read faithfully for years without ever commenting, because their lives are directly affected by your attempts to cause straight Christians to engage LGBT people. These readers are left explaining to their school administrators, church elders, families and friends, why what you taught of how to engage LGBT people is condescending and dehumanizing. Readers like me.

    ReplyDelete
  17. myka - you've said, "These readers are left explaining to their school administrators, church elders, families and friends, why what you taught of how to engage LGBT people is condescending and dehumanizing."

    that seems to be a pretty significant charge .... can you give me a concrete example of how you think i've encouraged a manner of engaging that has been condescending and dehumanizing? do you think it is condescending an dehumanizing to encourage people to 'stay present' rather than avoid and ignore the reality that many LGBT people face? that phrase seems to have triggered some frustration for you - and perhaps i'm not quite understanding what the disconnect is.

    (yes, leaving a modifier off LGBT was unintentional - as you will see by other references throughout the post)

    to me, it would seem highly presumptuous for me to suggest ways that LGBT people ought to be pursuing justice for themselves given that i will never fully know what it is like to live inside the skin of an LGBT person ..... so on these kinds of matters, my focus will be on straight christians primarily.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think that for many LGBT people, the advice to non-LGBT to "stay present" can be frustrating for a couple of closely related reasons.

    The first is that it's a blaring reminder that non-LBGT have the privilege of seeing staying present to LGBT issues as an option. They have the choice to tune it out or avoid these things if it makes them comfortable.

    LGBT people, not so much. These are the things we have to struggle with. We can't tune out or avoid them -- well, we can, but it will be to our own detriment. And I think that the reminder that other people can check out and ignore what's going on without personally suffering from it -- even when that reminder comes in the form of someone exhorting others not to do that -- tends to rankle a bit.

    Related, I think there's a sense of impatience involved. It's something I experienced myself when I originally read this blog post. While getting and staying present is (still) advice, it's advice that, in my opinion, should have been followed long ago. And the reminder that there are people who still haven't followed it is frustrating at times. It may not be helpful to feel like people would've gotten horrified to the point of actually doing something by now if they had already been practicing staying truly present, but it can be a difficult not to feel that way at times.

    I appreciate this post, but I will admit that the fact that it's still a relevant and necessary one is a bit distressing.

    ReplyDelete
  19. In my opinion, blog comments are not an appropriate forum for airing concrete examples that involve well-intentioned, misinformed people, so I must be somewhat vague.

    I have issues with the way I have seen you involve and engage individuals who are looking for help or resources from New Directions. You continue to model problematic language when speaking("same gender attracted", "non-heterosexual", etc) to Christian audiences. The people I know who have only gotten information about LGBT people from New Directions have attempted to "engage" me in ways that implied that I deserved pity for my deplorable state, or that I develop relationships (friendships, not romantic) in some unusual way. Knowing these people, the language they used points directly to you.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jared - I hear your frustration and impatience - totally understandable. Any one of us in the west has some privilege which gives them the choice to stay present or not to those who lack this privilege - and for those who lack such privilege: gender, race, economic etc. they have no choice but to deal with their challenging reality. We all need allies. And we all see people who could be our allies who choose not to. The church, which should be in the business of raising up allies and advocates, has often lost its way in its own complacency. And it is, indeed, distressing that such baby-step requests are still needed.

    Myka - if you would like to speak to me directly about some of the things you refer to, you are more than welcome to email me directly. both new direction and i have been on a journey - our messaging and language has continued to evolve. i am always open to hear ways to improve our language and to increase understanding where we can.

    ReplyDelete